Skip to content
Plinth
Foundation DossiersAlso receives grants — funding profile →
Plinth

· Public charity

International Academy of Trial Lawyers Foundation

The mission of the foundation is to engage in charitable and educational activities relating to the law and legal education in the united states and throughout the international legal community.

$295k
Granted FY2025still arriving
9
Grants FY2025still arriving
8
States reached
$75k
Largest
01What you fundRead
02The needRead
03Your edgeRead
04Your fieldRead
01What you fund
01

What you funded, over time

By grantee IRS cause code (NTEE).

A cause breakdown isn’t shown here: 51% of INTERNATIONAL ACADEMY OF TRIAL LAWYERS FOUNDATION’s grantee dollars fall outside its nine largest cause areas, whether because the recipient carries no IRS cause code or because its cause sits in the long tail. A chart would be mostly one residual band and misrepresent the portfolio.

02FY2025 · 9 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

The 9 grants below total $260,000 — the rows itemised in this filing. The $295,000 headline is the total grant expense reported on the return, so the remaining $35,000 is giving the schedule does not break out: grants under the $5,000 itemisation floor, grants to individuals, and grants reported on other schedules. Every figure below describes the itemised rows only.

By grant size · FY2025

  • $10k–50k8 grants · $185k
  • $50k–250k1 grant · $75k
$25,000
Median grant
8
States reached
$10M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
VECINA$75,000
INTERNATIONAL ACADEMY OF TRIAL LAWYERS$30,000
NATIONAL INSTITUTE FOR TRIAL ADVOCACY$30,000
INNOCENCE PROJECT NEW ORLEANS$25,000
ALFRED FRIENDLY PRESS PARTNERS$25,000
WORD JUSTICE PROJECT$25,000
SURVIVOR VENTURES INC$25,000
POLARIS PROJECT$15,000
A SENSE OF HOME$10,000
02The need
03

Do your dollars go where the need is?

Each grant placed by the hardship in its grantee’s ZIP, then read against the area’s typical level.

show:

Your human-services grants (FY23–25, $150k) land where the poverty rate runs at 16%, against an area that typically sits at 12%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 12%A SENSE OF HOME: $35k → 14%SURVIVOR VENTURES INC: $25k → 19%A SENSE OF HOME: $35k → 14%SURVIVOR VENTURES INC: $25k → 19%A SENSE OF HOME: $10k → 14%SURVIVOR VENTURES INC: $20k → 19%0%20%40%50%more need →
grant to an above-average-need area below average· circle size = grant amount

Matched: human-services grants are those whose grantee’s IRS cause code is Human Services. Placed by people below the poverty linein the grantee’s ZIP, averaged from the tracts in that ZIP; grantee ZIP can differ from where services are delivered.

Which US states your grants reach

MN
NV
PA
CT
CA
CO
MO
VA
MD
DC
LA
AL
TX

US grants placed by each grantee’s ZIP, which can differ from where services are actually delivered. Need from public data — U.S. Census/ACS, CDC PLACES, Eviction Lab, USDA — shown as context about the area, never attributed to your giving.

03Your edge
repeat funding

Who you back again

Which organizations you funded more than once, and which you funded a single time. Each grantee is matched to its own filings.

93%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.
$2.0M · 15 repeat orgs$155k to everyone else

15 repeat relationships — 9 still active in FY2025, 6 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

15
7

Total granted

$2.0M
$155k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+7%
+46%

Still filing today

100%
71%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

Where new relationships form · theme of each grantee’s first grant

’17’18’19’20’21’23’24’25
Crime & LegalHuman ServicesCivil RightsInternationalSocial ScienceYouth DevelopmentOther

First-time = a grantee’s first year in your filing window; renewed = funded in an earlier year too. As a portfolio matures the renewed share naturally climbs — once funded, an org stays “renewable” — so the signal is the years that buck it (a new-grantee intake wave). The earliest year is left-censored: relationships that predate the data read as “new.” Theme is the grantee’s IRS cause.

Backed again, and grew

  • IA
    INTERNATIONAL ACADEMY OF TRIAL LAWYERS
    9× · 2017–2025 · $772k · revenue +5%
  • V
    VECINA
    5× · 2021–2025 · $250k · revenue +209% · 31% of their budget
  • TN
    THE NATIONAL JUDICIAL COLLEGE
    8× · 2017–2024 · $220k · revenue +57%

Funded once

  • P
    PEACEBUILDERS
    one grant, 2019 · $35k
  • AC
    AFRICAN CENTER FOR LEGAL EXCELLENCE
    one grant, 2019 · $25k
  • KF
    Kellermann Foundationgraduated
    one grant, 2018 · $25k · revenue +46%

Repeat = funded in two or more distinct years; growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.

04Your field

The map has a center of gravity: the average direction from the rest of the sector toward the organizations the foundation funds — the shape of its giving. Scoring every nonprofit along that direction surfaces the ones that look most like the portfolio. These are the closest matchesthat aren’t grantees — a resemblance in what they say they do, not a recommendation.

1
American Law Institute

The institute's mission, as set out in its certificate of incorporation, is to promote the clarification and simplification of the law and its better adaptation to social needs, to secure the better administration of justice, and to…

Crime & Legal
2
Alliance for Justice

Alliance for justice builds the strength of progressive movements by training and educating nonprofit organizations on advocacy, while harnessing their collective power to transform our state and federal courts.

Civil Rights
3
American Association for Justice Education Fund

The national college of advocacy (nca) is the major program of the aaj education fund. the nca shall be the educational arm of aaj; shall be responsible for all aaj educational programs; and shall establish the education policy of aaj. nca…

—
4
The American College of Trust and Estate Counsel

Enhance the ability of actec members to provide the most efficient and highest quality services to their clients; develop qualified trust and estate counselors; improve and reform probate, trust and tax laws, procedures, and standards of…

Community Improvement
5
Office of the Appellate Defender

Oad strives to ensure that poor people convicted of felonies receive full and equal access to justice by providing exceptional appellate representation, improving the quality of indigent defense representation through education & training,…

Crime & Legal
6
National Association of College and University Attorneys

To advance the practice of higher education attorneys for the benefit of the institutions they serve.

—
7
Afl-Cio Union Lawyers Alliance

Afl-cio union lawyers alliance was established to better the conditions of working men and women and their families by enhancing the quality of legal representation that is available to the afl-cio and the national and international unions…

—
8
Association of Legal Administrators

Ala is the catalyst for growth by providing: diverse educational experiences, engaged peer communities, strategic solutions, dynamic resources, and trusted networks.

—
9
American Intellectual Property Law Association

The association was formed to maintain a high standard of professional ethics among its members and to aid in the institution of improvements in legal education and to provide information to the public in laws relating to patents,…

—
10
The Bar Association of San Francisco

The bar association of san francisco champions equal access to justice and promotes humanity, excellence, and diversity in the legal profession. we provide legal services to disadvantaged and underserved individuals in san francisco. we…

—
11
The Promise of Justice Initiative

The promise of justice initiative works to create positive change for people in the criminal legal system at the intersection of impact litigation, direct services and community engagement.

Crime & Legal
12
Twin Cities Diversity in Practice

To attract, recruit, advance, and retain attorneys of color in the twin cities through education and collaboration with member organizations.

Community Improvement

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is National Institute for Trial Advocacy and the most unlike its peers is The Alfred Friendly Foundation. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.

04the grantee network

21 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2025.

Each one resolved to its own IRS returns and tracked year by year — your grant beside their revenue from every source. Association, dated; never a causal claim.

Counted here: distinct organizations you funded across 2017–2025, not grant rows in a single year — so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 21 of the 22 grantees resolved in that span have returns of their own we could reconcile; the rest are funded organizations whose filings we could not track year by year.

1
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
5
Early backer (in before they grew)
21/21
Grantees still filing
16/21
Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

INTERNATIONAL ACADEMY OF TRIAL LAWYERS — $772,111 · OtherINTERNATIONAL ACADEMY OF TRIAL LAWYERSTHE NATIONAL JUDICIAL COLLEGE — $220,000 · OtherTHE NATIONAL JUDICIAL COLLEGE+4 more — $110,000 · Other+4 moreVECINA — $250,000 · Crime & LegalVECINAPUBLIC JUSTICE CENTER INC — $75,000 · Crime & LegalPUBLIC JUSTICE CENTER IN…WORLD JUSTICE PROJECT — $50,000 · Crime & LegalWORLD JUSTICE PROJECTPHILADELPHIA LEGAL ASSISTANCE CENTER INC C/O THE ORGANIZATION — $40,000 · Crime & LegalPHILADELPHIA LEGAL ASSIS…INNOCENCE PROJECT NEW ORLEANS — $40,000 · Crime & LegalINNOCENCE PROJECT NEW OR…+1 more — $10,000 · Crime & LegalA SENSE OF HOME — $80,000 · Human ServicesA SENSE O…SURVIVOR VENTURES INC — $70,000 · Human ServicesSURVIVOR …EDEN CENTERS — $32,100 · Human ServicesEDEN CENT…POLARIS PROJECT — $120,000 · InternationalKellermann Foundation — $25,000 · InternationalNATIONAL INSTITUTE FOR TRIAL ADVOCACY — $137,400 · Social ScienceNATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF WOMEN JUDGES — $34,500 · Civil RightsEQUAL JUSTICE INITIATIVE — $25,000 · Civil RightsHOMEBOY INDUSTRIES — $40,680 · Youth DevelopmentCOUNCIL OF CHIEF JUDGES OF THE STATE COURTS OF APPEAL — $20,300 · Public Benefit
Other$1,102,111Crime & Legal$465,000Human Services$182,100International$145,000Social Science$137,400Civil Rights$59,500Youth Development$40,680Public Benefit$20,300

Each org by its size and your share of it — top-left is where you’re load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ your share of their budgetINTERNATIONAL ACADEMY OF TRIAL LAWYERS — $772,111 over 9y, 23% of budgetVECINA — $250,000 over 5y, 31% of budgetTHE NATIONAL JUDICIAL COLLEGE — $220,000 over 8y, 0.9% of budgetNATIONAL INSTITUTE FOR TRIAL ADVOCACY — $137,400 over 7y, 0.5% of budgetPOLARIS PROJECT — $120,000 over 7y, 0.3% of budgetA SENSE OF HOME — $80,000 over 4y, 1.3% of budgetPUBLIC JUSTICE CENTER INC — $75,000 over 4y, 1.2% of budgetSURVIVOR VENTURES INC — $70,000 over 3y, 2.2% of budgetWORLD JUSTICE PROJECT — $50,000 over 2y, 0.3% of budgetHOMEBOY INDUSTRIES — $40,680 over 3y, 0.1% of budgetPHILADELPHIA LEGAL ASSISTANCE CENTER INC C/O THE ORGANIZATION — $40,000 over 2y, 0.3% of budgetINNOCENCE PROJECT NEW ORLEANS — $40,000 over 2y, 0.6% of budgetThe Alfred Friendly Foundation — $35,000 over 2y, 10% of budgetNATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF WOMEN JUDGES — $34,500 over 4y, 1.2% of budgetEDEN CENTERS — $32,100 over 2y, 1.5% of budgetKellermann Foundation — $25,000 over 1y, 1.8% of budgetEQUAL JUSTICE INITIATIVE — $25,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetCOUNCIL OF CHIEF JUDGES OF THE STATE COURTS OF APPEAL — $20,300 over 1y, 5.3% of budgetNEW HAVEN LEGAL ASSISTANCE ASSOCIATION INC — $15,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetTHE NITA FOUNDATION — $10,000 over 1y, 2.4% of budget
Go grantee by grantee — a decade per org, and how each moved after you funded them

A decade per grantee — revenue shaded, your grants as bars, all rows on one timeline.

The grantmakers whose grantees overlap with yours far more than size alone predicts. Each orbits closer the stronger the alignment; the arcs between them show where they also fund each other. Here it reads as a tightly interlocked camp — most of these funders back each other's grantees too.

National Philanthropi…Donor Advised Charita…American Online Givin…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
National Philanthropic TrustPA6.7× affinity4 shared granteesties to 4 of 4Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: National Philanthropic Trust · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · Amazonsmile Foundation

Affinity is a Gamma-Poisson posterior co-funding rate, re-centered on the typical rate, so thin evidence shrinks toward no signal. A research starting point: overlap is association, not proof of shared intent.

Government reliance of your grantees

Every dot is one organization International Academy of Trial Lawyers Foundation funds. Left–right is the share of its income from government; up–down is the share from you. Bigger dots raise more. Filter to federal or a single department — and drag the year to watch it move.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%3%10%23%40%your share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →median 5%
  • Public Justice Center Inc — 5% of income from government
  • New Haven Legal Assistance Association Inc — 2% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
0get no government money at all
3report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
0rely on government for over half their income
typical government reliance, FY20–25

Government income is each org’s traced federal awards (USASpending — grants and contracts) plus state payments (open checkbooks) as a share of its total revenue (IRS Form 990); the self-reported government-grant line (990 line 1e) is carried for cross-check: a grantee that reports government grants we could not trace to a source is left off the chart rather than shown as receiving none. An association, not a claim that your grant caused the public funding. Coverage is precision-first — a floor, not a census; state records exist for 9 states, so a grantee outside them shows no state figure (dimmed) rather than a false zero. Federal award amounts are obligations, which can span years, so a single-year share is indicative. 990 filings lag 12–24 months.

On method. Every financial figure here is read directly from IRS e-file XML — your own 990/990-PF and the multi-year returns of the 22 grantees we resolved across every year we hold, several hundred filings in all (a different count from the grant rows on the cover, which are one fiscal year)— each linked to its source. Grantee achievements and outcomes are each organization’s own program-service reporting (Form 990, Part III); we read these as association with sustained funding — the foundation is one of several forces — suppress low-confidence name matches rather than guess, and say so where a figure rests on a single grant or filing. Not everything on this page is a filed figure, and the difference matters. Filed is what you reported on your return. Official is another government record about an organization, such as a federal award or a charity register, joined by name where no shared identifier exists. Resolved is an identity we worked out where the filing named a recipient without an EIN, kept only above a measured confidence threshold. Computed is arithmetic over those, like themes, portfolio clusters and co-funder strength. Context is a statistic about a place rather than about an organization, which is what the need overlay is: it describes the area a grantee’s address sits in, not where its work lands. Inferred is drawn by a model from text, like the partnerships read out of public news and organization websites. Each is labeled where it appears. How we build these →

Generated from your IRS Form 990 e-file return for fiscal year 2025, released 2025. Filings run roughly 12–24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

Source object · view filing

More from the funding graph

The unnamed billions
grants reported with no recipient in the public record
The regranting layer
51% of grant dollars land in the regranting layer
The DAF merry-go-round
$9.7B circulates between donor-advised funds
The camps
funders cluster by geography, not ideology
By state
where grant money is based, and what stays home
State money flows
the interactive map of money crossing state lines